Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Shortcut: COM:AN/U

  Community Portal   Village Pump
(copyright & proposals)		   Help Desk
(Upload help)		   Administrators' Noticeboard
(vandalism, user problems, blocks and protections)		   Graphics Lab  
Administrator's assistance
Vandalism
(edit | watch)		 User problems
(edit | watch)		 Blocks and protections
(edit | watch)		 Other
(edit | watch)
English: Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.
Suomi: Raportoi ilmeisistä vandalismitapauksista. Muut estopyynnöt jätettäköön estojen ja suojauksen ilmoitustaululle.
Italiano: Segnala qui le utenze responsabili di vandalismi palesi. Richieste di blocco per qualsiasi altra ragione vanno effettuate nella sezione Politiche di blocco e protezione.
日本語: 明白な荒らし利用者の報告所。それ以外を理由とするブロック依頼はブロックと保護へ。
한국어: 문서 훼손을 저지른 사용자를 신고하는 곳입니다. 다른 이유로 인한 차단 요청은 차단 및 보호 요청 문서에 남겨주세요.
മലയാളം: ഉപയോക്താക്കളുടെ ഉറപ്പായ വാൻഡലിസത്തിനെക്കുറിച്ച് ഇവിടെ അറിയിക്കുക. മറ്റ് കാരണങ്ങൾക്ക് ഉപയോക്താക്കളെ തടയാനുള്ള അപേക്ഷകൾ തടയലുകളും സംരക്ഷണങ്ങളും എന്ന താളിലാണ് അറിയിക്കേണ്ടത്.
Svenska: Rapportera användare för tydliga tecken på vandalism. Begäran av blockering för någon annan anledning ska rapporteras på anslagstavlan för blockeringar och skydd.
Українська: Повідомляйте про користувачів, що явно займаються вандалізмом. Запити щодо блокування з будь-якої іншої причини повинні бути повідомлені на дошку для оголошень щодо блокування та захисту.
English: Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.
Suomi: Raportoi ylläpitäjän väliintulon vaativa käyttäjän ongelmallinen toiminta. Käytä käyttäjäongelmien ilmoitustaulua jollei ylläpitäjää tarvita.
Italiano: Segnala qui eventuali conflitti con altri utenti che richiedano l'intervento di un amministratore. In caso un amministratore non sia necessario si consiglia di utilizzare la sezione Risoluzione dei conflitti.
한국어: 관리자의 개입이 필요한 분쟁을 해결하는 곳입니다. 관리자의 개입이 필요하지 않다면 분쟁 해결 게시판을 이용하시기 바랍니다.
മലയാളം: മറ്റൊരു ഉപയോക്താവുമായുള്ള തർക്കത്തിൽ കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകർ ഇടപെടണമെങ്കിൽ ഇവിടെ അറിയിക്കുക. കാര്യനിർവാഹകരുടെ സഹായം ആവശ്യമില്ലെങ്കിൽ തർക്കങ്ങളുടെ നോട്ടീസ് ബോർഡിൽ ആണ് ഇക്കാര്യം അറിയിക്കേണ്ടത്.
Svenska: Rapportera tvister med användare som kräver hjälp av en administratör. Använd anslagstavlan för användarproblem om ingen administratörshjälp behövs.
Українська: Повідомляйте про суперечки з користувачами, котрі потребують допомоги адміністратора. Подальші кроки показані на сторінці щодо вирішення суперечок.
English: Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.
Italiano: Utilizza questa sezione per segnalare problemi non riferibili al vandalismo. Qui vanno anche le richieste di protezione e sprotezione pagine.
한국어: 문서 훼손 관련 관리자 요청에 맞지 않는 차단 요청이나 문서의 보호/보호 해제 요청을 이곳에서 할 수 있습니다.
മലയാളം: വാൻഡലിസം നോട്ടീസ്ബോർഡിൽ അനുചിതമായ അപേക്ഷകൾ ഇവിടെ നൽകാം. ഒരു താളിന്റെ സംരക്ഷിക്കാനുള്ള/സംരക്ഷണം മാറ്റാനുള്ള അപേക്ഷകളും ഇവിടെ നൽകാവുന്നതാണ്.
Svenska: Rapporteringar som inte passar anslagstavlan för vandalism kan rapporteras här. Begäran för sidskydd eller borttagning av sidskydd kan också begäras här.
Suomi: Tällä sivulla voit kuuluttaa vandalismin ilmoitustaululle sopimattomat ilmoitukset. Tällä ilmoitustaululla voit myös pyytää sivun suojaamista tai suojauksen purkua.
中文（简体）‎: 这里可以报告不适合破坏行为布告栏的报告。这里亦可以请求页面保护/解除保护。
Українська: Повідомлення, що не підходять для дошки для оголошень щодо вандалізму можна залишити тут. Запити щодо встановлення чи зняття захисту зі сторінок також можна запитати тут.
English: Other reports that require administrator assistance (i.e. requested moves/renames) which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed here.
Suomi: Tällä ilmoitustaulla voit kuuluttaa muille ilmoitustauluille sopimattomat ylläpitäjän huomion vaativat tehtävät ja ilmoitukset, esimerkiksi suojattujen sivujen siirrot. Pyynnöt sivuhistorian yhdistämisestä tai jakamisesta tulee tehdä täällä.
Italiano: Segnalazioni varie, non ricomprese tra le precedenti, che richiedano l'intervento di un amministratore (spostamenti, ridenominazioni, etc.); Se il tuo problema riguarda l'unione o la separazione delle cronologie pagine, allora puoi rivolgerti qui.
한국어: 다른 관리자 요청 문서에 맞지 않는 일반적인 관리에 대해 관리자의 도움을 요청하는 곳입니다.
മലയാളം: മറ്റ് മൂന്ന് നോട്ടീസ് ബോർഡുകളിലും ചേരാത്ത അപേക്ഷകൾ (പേര് മാറ്റൽ തുടങ്ങിയവ) ഇവിടെ നൽകാം. നാൾവഴിയിൽ മാറ്റം വരുത്തി നാൾവഴി ഭാഗിക്കാനോ യോജിപ്പിക്കാനോ ഉള്ള അപേക്ഷകൾ നൽകാൻ ഇവിടെ ഞെക്കുക.
Svenska: Andra rapporteringar som kräver administratörshjälp (t.ex. begärda flyttningar/namnbyten) som inte passar i någon av de föregående anslagstavlorna kan rapporteras här. Begäran för sammanslagning eller delning av historik ska lämnas in här.
Українська: Інші повідомлення, що потребують допомоги адміністратора (наприклад, запити на переміщення/перейменування), які не підходять до жодної з трьох попередніх дощок оголошень можуть бути залишені тут. Запити щодо об'єднання або роз'єднання історії мають бути зроблені тут.
Archives
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45
English: This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention.
العربية: هذا هو المكان حيث يمكن للمستخدمين التواصل مع الإداريين، أو الإداريين مع بعضهم البعض. يمكنك الإبلاغ عنه التخريب، المستخدمين الذين يسببون مشاكل، أو أي شيء آخر يحتاج للتدخل من قبل إداري.
Azərbaycanca: Bu bölüm istifadəçilərin idarəçilərlə ünsiyyət qura biləcəklər bir yerdir. Bir idarəçiyə vandalizmle müdaxilə ehtiyacı, problemli istifadəçilər ya da başqa bir şey ifadə edəbilərsiniz.
Català: Aquest és el lloc destinat a que els usuaris puguin comunicar-se amb els administradors, o viceversa. Podeu notificar edicions vandàliques, reclamar l'atenció sobre usuaris problemàtics, o indicar qualsevol altre assumpte que requereixi la intervenció d'un administrador.
Česky: Tato stránka slouží uživatelům ke komunikaci se správci zde na Commons, nebo ke komunikaci správců mezi sebou. Můžete zde nahlásit vandalismus, problematické uživatele nebo další záležitosti, které mohou díky svým pravomocem vyřešit jen správci.
Deutsch: Diese Seite ist für Gespräche mit Administratoren. Du kannst hier Probleme melden, die den Eingriff eines Administrators nötig machen, zum Beispiel Vandalismus oder Probleme mit anderen Benutzern.
Ελληνικά: Αυτή είναι μια σελίδα στην οποία οι χρήστες μπορούν να επικοινωνήσουν με διαχειριστές, ή οι διαχειριστές με κάποιον άλλο. Μπορείτε να αναφέρετε βανδαλισμούς, χρήστες που προκαλούν προβλήματα, ή οτιδήποτε άλλο χρειάζεται την παρέμβαση ενός διαχειριστή.
Esperanto: Ĉi tie estas loko kie uzantoj povas interkomunikiĝi kun administrantoj, aŭ administrantoj unu kun la alia. Vi povas raporti pri vandalismo, problemaj uzantoj, kaj ĉio alia, kio bezonas intervenon de administranto.
Español: Este es el sitio destinado a que los usuarios puedan comunicarse con los administradores, o viceversa. Puede notificar un vandalismo, reclamar atención sobre usuarios problemáticos, o indicar cualquier otro asunto que requiera la intervención de un administrador.
فارسی: این جا مکانیست که کاربران با مدیران، یا مدیران با یکدیگر می‌توانند ارتباط برقرار کنند. شما می‌توانید خرابکاری، کاربران مشکل‌ساز، یا هر آن چیز دیگری که نیاز به اقدام مدیران داشته باشد را گزارش کنید.
Français: Cette page est destinée à permettre aux utilisateurs et aux administrateurs de communiquer entre eux. Vous pouvez utiliser cette page pour signaler des actes de vandalisme, des utilisateurs au comportement problématique, ou tout autre fait nécessitant l'intervention d'un administrateur. Si vous ne maîtrisez que le français, la page Commons:Bistro reste cependant utilisable et vous y trouverez des administrateurs francophones.
Frysk: Op dizze side kinne meidoggers oerlizze mei behearders, of behearders mei inoar. Jo kinne hjir fandalisme, problematyske meidoggers en oare saken dy't oandacht fan in behearder freegje melde.
हिन्दी: यह वह स्थान है जहाँ सदस्य प्रबंधकों से, तथा प्रबंधक एक दूसरे से संवाद कर सकते हैं। आप बर्बरता, समस्याग्रस्त सदस्य या कोई और विषय जिसके लिए एक प्रबंधक के हस्तक्षेप की ज़रूरत हो, यहाँ बयान कर सकते हैं।
日本語: このページは、管理者同士、あるいは、利用者ユーザがJA:管理者,EN：administratorsと連絡を取るための場所です。問題のあるユーザを報告したり、荒らしユーザを通報したり、管理者の協力や仲介を必要とする事項などにご利用ください。
한국어: 이 문서는 사용자가 관리자, 혹은 관리자가 다른 관리자와 의견을 교환하는 곳입니다. 문서를 훼손하거나 문제가 있는 사용자를 보고하거나, 관리자의 중재가 필요한 사항이 있으면 이곳을 이용해주십시오.
Македонски: Ова е место каде што корисниците можат да комуницираат со администраторите, или пак администраторите меѓусебно. Тука можете да пријавувате вандализам, проблематични корисници, или било што друго кога има потреба од администраторска интервенција.
മലയാളം: കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകരുമായി ആശയവിനിമയം ചെയ്യാനുള്ള വേദിയാണിത്, കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകർക്ക് തമ്മിൽ തമ്മിൽ ചർച്ച ചെയ്യാനും ഈ താൾ ഉപയോഗിക്കാം. നശീകരണ പ്രവർത്തനങ്ങളെക്കുറിച്ചോ, പ്രശ്നകാരികളായ ഉപയോക്താക്കളെക്കുറിച്ചോ, അല്ലെങ്കിൽ കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകരുടെ ഇടപെടൽ ആവശ്യമായ മറ്റെന്തെങ്കിലും വിഷയങ്ങളെക്കുറിച്ചോ താങ്കൾക്ക് ഇവിടെ അറിയിക്കാവുന്നതാണ്.
Bân-lâm-gú: 遮是予用者佮管理員、抑管理員佮管理員咧講代誌的所在，你會當報告破壞、製造問題的用者抑其他需要管理員處理的代誌。
Norsk bokmål: Dette er en side for å kommunisere med administratorer. Her kan du melde fra om problemer som krever administratorers inngripen; for eksempel vandalisme eller problemer med andre brukere.
Polski: Jest to miejsce, gdzie użytkownicy mogą kontaktować się z administratorami lub administratorzy ze sobą nawzajem. Możesz zgłosić tu akt wandalizmu, problematycznego użytkownika albo cokolwiek, do czego potrzebna jest interwencji administratora.
Italiano: Questa è la pagina in cui gli utenti possono comunicare con gli amministratori, o questi ultimi tra loro. Puoi segnalare qui vandalismi, utenti problematici, e qualsiasi altra cosa richieda l'intervento di un amministratore.
Magyar: Ezen a helyen üzenhetnek a szerkesztők az adminisztrátoroknak, vagy az adminisztrátorok egymásnak. Itt jelentheted a vandalizmust, a problémás szerkesztőket, vagy bármi más olyat, amihez adminisztrátori közreműködésre van szükség.
Português: Este é o local no qual os usuários podem se comunicar com os administradores, ou onde os administradores podem conversar uns com os outros. Aqui você pode relatar casos de vandalismo, usuários problemáticos ou tratar de qualquer outro assunto que requeira a atenção de um administrador.
Română: Această pagină este destinată comunicării dintre utilizatori şi administratori sau între administratori. Aici poţi semnala cazuri de vandalism, utilizatori cu comportament problematic, precum şi alte situaţii care necesită intervenţia unui administrator.
Русский: Это место, где участники могут обратиться к администраторам, а администраторы обсудить вопросы друг с другом. Вы можете сообщить о вандализме, некорректных действиях участников и всём прочем, что, по вашему мнению, нуждается во вмешательстве администраторов.
Suomi: Tällä sivulla voit keskustella ylläpitäjien kanssa. Voit esimerkiksi ilmoittaa meneillään olevasta vandalismista, ongelmakäyttäjistä tai mistä tahansa muusta joka tarvitsee ylläpitäjien huomiota.
Nederlands: Op deze plaats kunnen gebruikers communiceren met de beheerders, of de beheerders met elkaar. U kunt hier vandalen, of probleemgebruikers melden, of andere dingen die de aandacht van een beheerder nodig hebben.
Slovenčina: Táto stránka slúži používateľom na komunikáciu so správcami tu na Commons, alebo na komunikáciu správcov navzájom. Môžete tu nahlásiť vandalizmus, problematických používateľov alebo ďalšie záležitosti, ktoré môžu vďaka svojím právomociam vyriešiť len správcovia.
Српски / srpski: Ово је место где корисници могу да комуницирају са администраторима, или администратори са другима. Овде можете пријавити вандализам, проблематичне кориснике, или било шта друго што тражи интервенцију администратора.
Svenska: Det här är en sida där användare kan prata med administratörer, eller där administratörer kan prata med varandra. Du kan rapportera vandalism, problematiska användare eller någonting som behöver en administratörs ingripande.
Türkçe: Bu bölüm kullanıcıların yöneticilerle iletişim kurabilecekleri bir yerdir. Bir yöneticiye vandalizmle müdahale ihtiyacı, sorunlu kullanıcılar ya da başka bir şey bildirebilirsiniz.
Tiếng Việt: Đây là nơi người dùng có thể liên lạc với bảo quản viên, hoặc giữa những bảo quản viên với nhau. Bạn có thể báo cáo phá hoại, thành viên có vấn đề, hoặc bất cứ điều gì khác cần đến sự can thiệp của một bảo quản viên.
中文（简体）‎: 这里是用户能够与管理员或与管理员及另一个人沟通的地方。你可以报告破坏行为、问题用户或其他需要管理员干预的事情。
中文（繁體）‎: 這裡是用戶與管理員或管理員之間進行通訊的地方。您可以在此回報破壞、有問題的用戶，或其他需要管理員介入的事情。
Shqip: Ky është një vend ku përdoruesit mund të komunikojnë me administruesit, ose administruesit me njëri-tjetrin. Mund të raportosh vandalizëm, përdorues problematik dhe gjithçka tjetër ku ka nevojë për ndërhyrje të administruesve.
Important discussion pages (index)
Gnome User Speech.svg

Note

  • Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
  • It is usually appropriate to notify the user(s) concerned. {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/U|thread=|reason=}} is available for this.
  • Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

Contents


[edit] User:Fry1989

Deutsch:

En: This user is just generally intolerable. He calls me obviously (for no apparent reason, here and above #User:Bossange) as a troll in a version-history.[1] Not a week goes by now where no serious conflicts with him here is on COM: AN prevail. He has often shown in the past (here and elsewhere, he was already blocked infinitive), and shows that he is only willing limited improvement. His excuse is only always that he it is an invaluable member here on Commons.[2](not the time to prove more) There are umpteen files from him, where he, after his own taste removes strokes/outlines called "unnecessary", reverted against references without reason! However, I ask for a decision on concrete file. Besides, my last reporting was closed by enem regular user with false reasoning.[3] -- ΠЄΡΉΛΙΟ ℗ 18:26, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

As opposed to the personal attacked you've engaged in against me the last month or two? In fact, it's difficult to find anything you've said on Commons in reference to me that doesn't contain some sort of thinly-veiled personal attack. And where did I ever say I'm an invaluable member here? You sure do enjoy putting words in my mouth. You call me a troll, I call you a troll, you revert me on images, I revert you......back and forth, back and forth. I've had it. I want an interaction ban with you because you are impossible to work with. I don't ever want to see you again, and hopefully it's mutual. For outsiders, this is obviously a situation of two users who will never get along, please support my request for an interaction ban between Perhelion and myself. Fry1989 eh? 18:39, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I would think that looking at the interactions between these two, and especially Perhelion's objectives, an IB is a good idea. Penyulap ☏ 02:20, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I suggest a 1 month trial voluntary interaction ban, agreed to by both Perhelion and Fry1989. If it fails, stricter interaction ban could be looked into by the community but should looked into as a last resort, not the first. Bidgee (talk) 03:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I never put words in your mouth! I never changed the (informal) content of other posts! Where are your links???
  • Why you mark always your discussion-posts or remove other posts as/with minor? It's not the stylish place: When not to mark an edit as a minor edit (not to say that's antisocial)
  • IB: Yes run away from the truth egomaniac: Where is the limit for your IB's? If it's helpful ok, but before I want only a substantive decision to the few following file-reverts (he always knows all original government-references)
  1. File:Coat of Arms of the First Slovak Republic.svg (ref on info) border completely removed
  2. File:Coat of arms of Brazil.svg border removed (as reported here his arguments are hypocritical lied/nonsense) ref is fully vector gov.br (unfortunately I had not enough time to respond)
  3. File:Coat of Brasil.png the same original pixel-version overwritten with his own SVG-version (pixel-ref gov.br)
  4. File:P05 CZ.svg (ref on info, vector source) border changed to black (as reported here)
  • "I gotta say Fry, after watching you for the last couple days... you are the cause of most of your problems. – JBarta (talk) 21:26, 4 April 2013 (UTC)"[ref]
-- ΠЄΡΉΛΙΟ ℗ 11:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Perhelion, you absolutely put words in my mouth. You claim/inferred that I said I'm "the law", and that I'm an "invaluable member", things I have never said. Show us all where I have said these things!
  • You follow me around and revert me on images for no reason. I was specifically asked by an admin to look into File:Bandeira do Espírito Santo.svg and it was being discussed on my talk page. I changed the image saying "per talk", meaning it was being discussed on my talk page. You reverted me just because I didn't post my source in my edit sumamry, saying "not given a ref". I reverted you telling you that it was being discussed on my talk page and you could see the refs there, and instead of joining the discussion, you just reverted me again.
  • You attack me at every turn. You are in fact on notice for personally attacking me for no reason. I nominated an image for deletion, and just because you didn't like my reasoning for nominating it, you call me "completely incompetent". You called me it twice on that page, when it had nothing to do with the DR itself. That was completely out of left field and uncalled for.
  • You lie about me. Want an example of your extremely transparent lies? Let's look at File:Coat of Brasil.png. You claim I overwrote it, but Tonyjeff is the one who actually overwrote it back on November 7, 2010, copying the SVG over onto the PNG. I simply duplicated that overwrite on January 27, 2012 when the SVG was again changed. So while yes, strictly speaking I did over-write the file, my over-writing it was not your problem, you just don't like me touching things. That's made clear by the fact that you were SO incensed by my overwrite of the image, that you didn't revert to it's original state but back to Tonyjeff's overwrite, and I don't see you complaining about when he did it. Your lies and motives about that file is so obvious it's pathetic. In fact, you already tried to pass this off once before, and I called you out on it back then, but you're still attempting to use it.
I don't want anything to do with you anymore. I want this interaction ban and I will pursue it for as long as it takes. Fry1989 eh? 18:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Only a blind person would not be able to see how transparent Perhelion's lies and motives are. I'm not going away until I get an IB. Fry1989 eh? 19:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
I hope no admin is so blind to engage in this totally pathetic rhetoric ramblings (The Art of Being Right, Tu quoque ). Sorry, if I had another understanding of "put words in my mouth" (normally that implied that I mean that someone told that) Now I hope this is a good example of how someone (egomaniac) here deals with a normal (more energetic) representatives only for the truth. Can one answer really more ridiculous with provocative exaggerations?
  • (circumstantial ad hominem) This topic is more discussed here: #User:Bossange
  • (bias ad hominem, circumstantial ad hominem) You are in fact the first and only person in many years (since 2004 with other acc) here in Wikipedia and Commons for what I become ever an personal AN.eh?
  • (abusive ad hominem, Tu quoque)
  • (mutatio controversiae) In fact: You are completely dodged my questions with irrelevant accusations!!!
  • You use pettifogging (Rabulistik) pathetic rhetoric as a substitute for real arguments: (Eristic: You use always obviously most of: argumentum ad hominem: abusive ad hominem, bias ad hominem, circumstantial ad hominem, Tu quoque)
“The same lie will be not true, the more it is repeated, but the more it is believed.”
I'm not a egomanic liar or idiot, I'm normally against an IB. -- ΠЄΡΉΛΙΟ ℗ 10:40, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
You are a liar, atleast about your motives if not the strict facts. If you were truly so bothered by my overwrite of File:Coat of Brasil.png, you would not have reverted back to another overwrite by Tonyjeff, you would have reverted back to the file's original state. That one course of action by itself is a prime example of your hypocrisy. But then you lie about other things, you engage in thinly-veiled personal attacks in almost everything you every say about me, you even directly attack me for no reason. Why did you have to call me "completely incompetent" in that DR twice? You actually agreed that the file should be deleted because you said it's licensing was false, but you just had to add in that little jab at me anyways. Then, when you were called out on it, you doubled down and called me incompetent again and added another attack calling me anti-social. You are a bully, and I wont put up with you any more. Quite frankly whether you're in favour of IBs or not is irrelevant to me, show me where it says an IB has to be mutually requested between two users. I want one, I will push through this page until I get it. I will not allow you to bully me any longer. Fry1989 eh? 18:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
You're doing more and more ridiculous, the facts speak, not your childish personal attack drivel. The version from Tonyjeff is from gov.br has he said (it seems a render copy of the vector source and nearly identical to the reference shown above and not the other files.)!
As so often said your exaggerations are excessive and ridiculous. It's like a troll, you can not talk to him. On the contrary, I had apologized for the words ("incompetent discernment") ... -- ΠЄΡΉΛΙΟ ℗ 09:20, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Your entire premise for reverting me on that PNG is because I overwrote it with a copy of the SVG. If you truly had such a problem with people overwriting images, you would not have reverted to Tonyjeff's overwrite, you would have reverted to the file's original state. That you are now making excuses for your hypocrisy shows exactly why I need this IB. You don't have any principles, you just target me because I do things differently here, and it annoys you. You don't like me touching things, and will make any excuse to interfere. Fry1989 eh? 19:00, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Still waiting, not going away. Fry1989 eh? 15:55, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm tired to answer your... You try only to pull me and my intentions in the dirt, as I have clearly remarked above. Then let speak more simple facts. It is surely clear that an official raster-version and a vector-version are near identical! I've principles (unlike you?)!: Overwrite with SVG-rendering (which is an proposed Commons guideline, policy.) Here some other examples from me: Albrecht Dürer - Monogramm.png,Wappen von Rees.png,Wappen Landkreis Spree-Neisse.png,Coat of Arms of Kirovohrad Oblast.svg,Kreiswappen des Kreises Lippe.png,Wappen lk suew.png
-- ΠЄΡΉΛΙΟ ℗ 10:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
I know you think you're so clever and that you "got me" by digging up a quote, but you failed to properly read what I said and it's context. You don't have anything on me. I have alot on you though. I want this IB, and I WILL get it. I will open as many AN/Us as I have to, I will harass as many admins as I have to. Are you people listening? I don't want anything more to do with Perhelion. His bullying and hypocrisy and lies have become intolerable. Fry1989 eh? 18:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Still here. Fry1989 eh? 15:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Before: Where I can get a third opinion for a file decision? -- ΠЄΡΉΛΙΟ ℗ 17:29, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
You don't get one, that would trivialize the point of an IB if you could just ask for a 3O every time I change something and you don't like it. Such behaviour is why I want this IB in the first place (along with unsolicited personal attacks). If you have a serious concern with an edit I have made, I'll agree that you (and I in return) can raise it as a discussion on AN, which would be exempt from IB restrictions. Fry1989 eh? 17:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Still here. Fry1989 eh? 19:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Fastily

Good evening,

I hereby offer to launch a deadminship procedure against Fastily, with four rationales:

(1) Fastily closes DR with too many errors. He clearly prefers quantity to quality. This leads to some problematic situations:

  • Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:NeocoreGames. The DR were about revisions of the files, he deleted files. Of course, without any reply to the de minimis debate. This DR is really with the French one noted above is really a proof he doesn't read the DRs. Maybe the fact the DR were about revisions and not files were hidden in the DR? Let's read it:
Paradox Interactive Logo isn't covered by OTRS ticket, which only allows screenshots/concept art.

Uploader originally removed logo and requested old revisions deletion, but processing the request, it occurred to me logo could be de minimis. We allowed in the past for example coffee machine with Nespresso logo.

So the question is are the logo de minimis?. If so, we should revert the logos removal on each version. If not, we should delete them (the revisions, not the files).

Warning. As mentioned before, this DR concerns old revisions of the file. It doesn't pursue to delete current files.

Hmmm... it seemed rather clear. I don't know about the other contributors, but when I take the time to write very precisely something (the question, the YES action, the NO action), with a warning message in bold, I expect the person who close it to read that.

I could go on this list but these three samples illustrate the "close without read the DR" behavior I noticed.

(2) Fastily doesn't comment closures. During the four first days in the DRs work in March, 19 messages in 4 days were let on his talk page (counted by DR, not by person). Yes, he succeeded to close DRs and raise 19 questions about closures in 4 days!

Argument given by Fastily as reply is it's only 19 on a lot of DRs closed. Even if he would have closed 1000 DRs these days, that would mean 3,8% (one DR to 26) were wrong or raised questions! This is a very high ratio, especially, as Fastily close less than 1000... (500? one DR to 13! 100? one DR to 5!).

This could be because none of the DR are commented, raising a lot of questions. DRs are also a place where we can educate contributors and explain to people how Wikimedia Commons apply copyright issues.

Indeed, when a DR asks one or more questions on copyright law, the closure doesn't contain any reply to the question, so people aren't able to understand it. I seriously wonder if he reads these questions, because well... the examples in (1) makes me wonder if Fastily reads the DR before to close them.

(3) Fastily refuses to amend himself. When challenged on the DR matters, he considers to do the right things, justify ad nauseam we have a backlog and we have to empty it, than his closures. Strangely, the restore log tells a different story (Two examples: 1 and 2).

(4) Fastily lied. When I see him on IRC March 16th, I notified him the 19 messages in 4 days fact noted in (1) weren't acceptable. He declared he asked tools to "help assist [him] in [his] dev work" and to be "over it" about the DRs and to not close anymore DRs. He quickly resumed this activity, with still a constant stream of complaints on his talk page.

This discussion shows the decision to assign him again the sysop tools were contested from the start, and the bureaucrat having given the right back agrees it were a bad idea.

In conclusion, the ratio cost/benefits for Wikimedia Commons of having Fastily to delete stuff seems to me to justify a deadminship.

Note: If a real need of the tools is demonstrated by Fastily, I'm open to a social restriction like to forbid Fastily to use sysop tools for deletion purpose instead. --Dereckson (talk) 00:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fastily is a cool-headed and helpful admin. Some of the points also seem trivial, for example "(2) Fastily doesn't comment closures.". Yes that can be an annoyance, but I can list a bunch of admins who often don't, it's hardly a reason to remove. Fry1989 eh? 00:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback.
I mainly by this point search an explanation for so much complaints about DR on his talk page. Probably if the no comment weren't combined with being wrong and delete without read, that wouldn't be so problematic, like for the other admins you point.
Should I deduct from your « Some of the points also seem trivial », some others points are serious? Maybe the fact Fastily doesn't read DR before to close it for example?
Furthermore, I don't agree with your cool-headed statement: “Multichill and I disagreed once in the past, and since then, he's made it his mission to belittle, harass, and childishly attack me at every opportunity” (diff here). This kind a personal attack isn't something I qualify of cool-headed. --Dereckson (talk) 00:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
It is extremely ironic how you quoted my answer to multichill when this entire post of yours is driven by the same motive of emotional, personal vengeance. True, we've disagreed in the past, and perhaps not even in the most professional manner, but it is most disappointing to see that you've taken your baseless grudge to the next level on a fallacious, exaggerated set of arguments. -FASTILY 03:47, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This needs dispute resolution, not deadminship proceedings. —Mono 00:31, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Dispute resolution is for conflicts between users. Here I see tool abuse and behavior (close DRs without reading them), bad for the project. --Dereckson (talk) 00:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

It would help if you included a link to some misbehaviour, I've read through all of that and followed the links and read them, and there is nothing of merit here. I love a good de-adminship as much as the next guy, but your link to this discussion is more of a reason for a de-adminship discussion for Ecemaml than Fastily. I'd like to consider supporting a de-adminship discussion, but you'll have to dig up some trash of merit first. Penyulap ☏ 00:36, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Why someone would want to dig up stuff? I stated a clear problem: Fastily closes DR and deletes files without reading first the DRs and I seek a solution. I'm not interested by wiki-drama. --Dereckson (talk) 00:43, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
So ? Fae closed a recent discussion where it's been PROVEN that he didn't read the comments there, PLUS where it's been brought to his attention that he didn't read someone comment, he can't even tell us who made the comment, seriously, I give Fastily extra points for being somewhat sober and often awake whilst editing, that's a good thing for an admin, he doesn't give off that whole 19'60's Kombie full of smoke 'Whoa man, just let me get my head together, Whoooah' kind of feeling. (nods) Penyulap ☏ 00:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Closing DRs without comment is not good, but hardly deadmin worth. Most DRs don't need comments. I agree, let's have some discussion before deadmin.
Sidenote, but the new AN/U layout annoys me - the tables make it look like this is already archived. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:20, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Ah, and matt here can tell you Fastily is polite, matt told me to 'fuck off' for trying to fix things at the VP, hmm, yes, many an admin has a POTTY-MOUTH. Incidentally I've fixed that boxing a few times, and it gets undone. Easy enough to find the edit summary where I fix it I probably mention community tabs, that'd give people the code required to edit war. Penyulap ☏ 01:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would think that a better solution than taking the bit away from Fastily would be to find a way to get more admins involved with closing DRs. That way more time could be taken on each individual DR, and we wouldn't get a huge backlog that very few admins are willing to address. I think this de-adminship suggestion is a bit extreme, especially considering that fastily always does his best to fix any mistakes he makes, and that he donates quite a bit of his time to doing the "dirty work". INeverCry 01:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, Fastily (talk · contribs) is a helpful admin with a good sense of judgment and professional demeanor. -- Cirt (talk) 03:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Fastily's activities on DRs are apauling. When I see this person's name as the closer of any of the DRs that I am watching my heart freezes for a second. I would say that the reason is followed about 60-70% of the time, which I better than a completely random chance, but there is a lot of work to be done. Deletion of in scope images seems to be the biggest problem, but it is probably more a problem with this whole community at this time where people think that by destroying somebody else's work they have accomplished something. There are some other activities of this admin which I find very inappropriate, but there's no reason to dump them here. I believe that this individual should be warned and should think clearly about one's actions, but not deadmined. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 03:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

It would be nice if Fastily could be bothered to provide a meaningful explanation for apparently surprising decisions, such as at Commons:Deletion requests/uploads by VBLPhoenix, instead of dismissing my concerns with an ultimately rather uncommunicative brush-off message, as he did here... AnonMoos (talk) 03:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Rationale updated. I can't say I held you in the highest esteem following our disagreement over source with regards to PD-old files, but given that your position on the matter has, through consensus, become accepted Commons practice, you do have my apologies. -FASTILY 03:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
How did he find out about this discussion anyhow? spooky! (that's ominous, it's like he's everywhere) Penyulap ☏ 04:04, 16 April 2013 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am also concerned by Fastily's carelessness-through-speed, and believe that his actions are often quite risky. On the other hand, he is usually responsive to criticism, and his heart is in the right place. So this is neither a vote for or against at this stage, but I do want to throw a couple of observations into the mix so that we have enough information to discuss the best outcome:
  1. Fastily runs two bots FSIII FSV that I am aware of, which have not been submitted for approval by the community. He also appears to use automated tools through his main (admin) account. Five days ago I asked if this could be rectified, and got an (ambiguously) affirmative answer, but it was archived with no action since.
  2. The bots are often used at speeds much faster than the standard speed limit. I have previously blocked Fastily's bots for violating the bot speed limits, and he rectified the problem at the time, so he was already well aware of the rules.
  3. One of the things the bots do is upload hundreds of (sometimes large) files, which are then deleted with his admin account. The stated aim is to test his upload framework. However, this often amounts to bulk-copyvio uploads. For example File:YRqbvuSOos1374038982693326550.pdf (lecture notes) File:ZyOvow3221396996319577159.pdf (in-copyright book), and many many others. (It also concerns me how much disk space is consumed in this endeavour, but that is a tangential point).
  4. Recently his bot-tagging accidentally put two very very heavily used files at risk of (automated?) deletion: [4] [5]. Undoing the consequences of a deletion would have been a nightmare. But as I mentioned earlier, Fastily is usually responsive when an error is identified.
  5. One speedy deletion I am aware of clearly wasn't even looked at, because the requested license had already been added by a new uploader, who had simply failed to remove one of the no-license tags.

To be clear, I don't think Fastily's actions stem from any bad faith on his part, but I think there are valid reasons to ask for and expect change in his operations. --99of9 (talk) 04:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

And bring up your pet beef day with Fastily continues. Frankly, I was beginning to wonder when you were going to post here.
  1. My same conditions stand. I will gladly take these over to BRFA, if you promise not to harass/belittle/accuse me of bad faith like you did here. You never agreed to this, and because I know you will comment on my BRFAs, I have taken no action.
  2. For the record, you have never blocked my bots for violating your speed limit guideline. Either way, I have set up my own, private, designated mediawiki server to run tests on because of your continued harassment.
  3. No bots are ever run out of my main account. I use a set of self-written, supervised, semi-automted tools (see User:Fastily/FAQ#Programming), not too unlike visualfilechange.js or cat-a-lot. The upload test suite used to randomly select a folder from a big pile of junk documents to upload. I will admit that it was an oversight to not police what it was uploading, but as far as I know, and according to Category:Test images, " License may but must not apply. ". If that's wrong, you'd better remove it. Nonetheless, these unit tests will trouble you no more because they now run on my local, private server.
  4. This was the result of a broken library function. I set it to mass tag the images in a gallery, but it accidentally included those files as well. I already explained to you that this was fixed the moment you brought it up.
  5. I do my best to avoid mistakes, but being human, I'm not perfect, and neither are you. If I was, I'd be your god.
-FASTILY 04:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Bots need approval. That's the law. Still, bot requests need interested parties to comment on them as well. My request for a bot flag on Japanese wiki has taken a solid 12 months to get any interest at all, and it still has not been decided. I only just noticed that someone had noticed it just that moment when I checked. (sigh) still, someone should help Fastily by looking at his bot thing to see if it has merit to counter any possible 'IDon't like you' type comments. Won't be me though, I can't be bothered. Bots are boring, just ask them. Still PALZ9000 has been operating on Ja.wiki for a year and zero people care.
Although PALZ sockpuppet did cause quite a stir by uploading hideous poetry to commons, and for some reason they blocked his sock's never-used account on en.wiki. Penyulap ☏ 05:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  1. You equate assuming bad faith with the harassment and belittlement you feel, and I have repeatedly assured you that I am confident of your good faith.
  2. You're right, it wasn't all about the speed: Full block rationale, but you were certainly made aware of the speed limits. The speed limits are obviously not mine, but yes, I do expect that an administrator would uphold a community guideline except in unusual circumstances. Thank you for setting up your test server, that does mitigate some of my bot concerns.
  3. "randomly selected", "[un]policed", "broken library function", "accidentally", "oversight", "mistakes". To me these point to carelessness, and carelessness combined with robots/automated tools equals danger.
--99of9 (talk) 06:04, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
(Edit conflict.) anything + 'robots/automated tools equals' Hysteria, Richard, after 5 million edits to en.wiki was blocked for using cut'n'paste just once. I think Japan is cool with bots. Penyulap ☏ 06:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I see you have ripped my words out of context and literally twisted them to fit your absurd accusation. This blatant attempt to bait me is appalling, and most unbecoming of a bureaucrat. You repeatedly claim to assume good faith, but I'm just not seeing it. -FASTILY 06:20, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What INeverCry said. It does seem to be more of a systemic problem than that of any one user who actually steps into the firing line here. The alternative to closing all these DRs is either letting them lapse and creating a backlog which no-one will ever look at or care about, or closing requests after a certain time as Kept due to no consensus, which would make requesting deletion next to useless in many cases. This doesn't make Fastily immune to criticism, but there are so few people involved in closing DRs that it's impractical to get it done in time without sacrificing some care. It would be the same no matter who were doing it. One of course can argue that not getting it done is preferable, but that's another discussion –⁠moogsi (blah) 08:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I'll keep this topic open (but keep it on topic and within the AN/U's scope), allowing anyone to give their opinions regrading Fastily's actions. There is no consensus of support to remove his Sysop rights but I do hope that he takes the criticism on-board. Fastily, I suggest that you request bot status for your bots per 99of9's comments. Bidgee (talk) 09:09, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Well if all there is are comments that belong on Fastily's talkpage, then some pie would be ok, along with the hey what about bot bits for those bots of yours. I says we find someone who needs punishment and force them to take up the boring task of bot assessment. If double voting in elections doesn't do it, I hardly see how using ANU as Fastily's personal talkpage is going to do it. Still, I know jack about Fastily except there was something I don't know about en.wiki, which doesn't count either way, so we need more meat to have a good BBQ. Or some pie, pie is good, is there more pie, enough for everyone ? let's all have pie. I had some before, it was nice. I like pie. Penyulap ☏ 09:28, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Penyulap, Can you please stop hi-jacking topics? It is starting to become rather irritating. Bidgee (talk) 09:37, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Bidgee, deleting other people edits, like this and this and this is trying to keep the Jet-plane in a contentious place, rather than having a calming effect upon the discussion. I think you are taking editing commons as far too much of a life-and-death sort of most important thing in the world kind of thing. A bit of wikilove goes a long way to easing tensions. Calling it trolling is nonsense. You just don't like wikilove I think, which is why you call it, and me, the Luurrv doctor, irritating. Lighten up. Penyulap ☏ 11:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fastily has been too trigger-happy for far too long. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Unfortunately it was me who granted his request to get the bit back: I resigned my tools some time ago, believing that I no longer had any use for them. Lately, I have been developing several editing tools for Commons, and it'd really be useful to have the tools back so as to make testing less of a pain. This turned out to have been quite a misrepresentation. I blame myself for not looking into the circumstances of the resignation and believing tool testing motivation. Fastily was a familiar name to which I had no negative associations at that time :-(. --Dschwen (talk) 03:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In my experiences with him, he is occasionally too quick to delete. But he's a generally competent admin who's fantastic at getting things done. When you're handling so much volume, it's natural to make mistakes along the way; we're human. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Commons certainly wouldn't benefit from desysopping him. --A.Savin 11:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose He's irreplaceable. That's not an unqualified endorsement, but a statement of fact. We have a large volume of work to do, he does it reasonably competently, and we have no one interested in taking on that volume of work do to.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Prosfilaes that Fastily is doing a lot of work and he would be hard to replace. However, I rarely have a reason to double check results of deletion requests, but it seems each time I do I find incorrectly (IMHO) closed DR by Fastily. For example:
  1. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Afghanistan 110605-M-XX999-003 (5839031876).jpg - which was only send to DR because it come from isafmedia's photostream which is blacklisted. The nominator did not see anything wrong with the file but wanted to double check. Fastily deleted it with no explanation.
  2. I also could not figure out the reasons for deleting File:Afghanistan arms 1973-1974.svg which was derived from File:Afghanistan arms 1931-1973.svg (by deleting 4 letters), while keeping the source file.
  3. I was also puzzled by Commons:Deletion requests/File:State arms of German Democratic Republic.svg (used on en:East Germany) which was deleted because of disputed accuracy. However accuracy is not a valid reason for deletion: we keep files and let individual wikipedias decide which file to use.
All of those cases indicate deletion closures which are done without taking time to understand (and may be even read) the issues involved. I do not know how typical those are, but for me those are just random sample of files I run into. To his defense he always promptly undeleted files I pointed out. Finally, templates like {{No license since}} asks admins to verify the file history that the license was not removed throughout vandalism or accident. Fastily is deleting files with {{No license since}} at the rate of ~70/minute and I do not think it is possible to check the history at that rate. Even the explanation of his speed at User:Fastily/FAQ does not seem right: it would take hours to look up history of 1-2 hundred files. --Jarekt (talk) 14:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
  • A few words for Fastily: you do a lot of work, however sometimes I would like to see you act less like a robot than you do. I do remember undeleting pictures of The Milkmaid which were obviously public domain all over the world that you had deleted by accident. --PierreSelim (talk) 11:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support he has been a recurring topic on these noticeboards for quite some time and will be that in the future if he stays administrator. I really don't appreciate the personal attacks directed at me. He is one of the reasons I'm much less active ont Commons. Multichill (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've not checked this page for a few days, so I didn't see the discussion until now. I'm a bit troubled about how Fastily handles his talk page. For example, I posted a question about a questionable deletion and Fastily has set up archival of discussions which haven't been edited for 24 hours. However, Fastily hasn't been editing for over a week, so this discussion (together with other discussions) were archived without any reply. Also, check this and this: two seemingly identical situations, one closed as delete (although the file remains with the {{delete}} template still there) and one closed as keep. By the way, I think that there was a discussion about one of them at COM:VPC after the "keep" closure. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

[edit] SimonMKay

SimonMKay (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads) block user

Multiple issues here, and I'm pressed for time to continue to look into it at the moment. The user has a long history of copyright violations (see log). The following issues need further investigation, and I believe blocks and other measures are in order. Sorry for leaving the investigation work half done.

They recently started uploading files from http://www.flickr.com/people/89901053@N08, which is possibly the user's own account for license laundering purposes given that File:Kaitlyn and Layla vs Eve Torres and Beth Phoenix.jpg was uploaded to Flickr on 2013-04-10 and then uploaded here on 2013-04-16. Needs to be added to COM:QFI and other uploads need checking too.

Have a look at File:Kaitlyn.jpg and possible deleted edits there. Interests and edits between the user and Davidlasngel (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads) block user seem to overlap suspiciously. Socks, anyone? May be worth looking for others too. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:21, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
As this thread about the placement of the proposed moderate restriction of Penyulap is leading nowhere and as Penyulap now has opened an additional playgroundthread at VP[6], there is no need to keep this open. --Túrelio (talk) 12:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


[edit] Concerning Penyulap and the section above: (Penyulap 2)

Despite the fact I'm under investigation here myself, I feel obliged to comment. Could I please ask that mattbuck retract his close of the vote and restriction subsequently placed on Penyulap? He is clearly involved in this matter, and I do not feel he is distanced from it far enough to be able to make an objective closure, and with being involved, I don't feel he should be closing it anyway, regardless of how close he is. I would ask another admin, one who so far is not in that thread, to close in an appropriate manner - (and take into account the votes in the section below, requesting no restriction). BarkingFish (talk) 01:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, admin Mattbuck (talk · contribs) did a fine job with the close and the restriction is sensible, rational, and a logical step moving forwards which will hopefully help to ameliorate the behavior pattern in the future. -- Cirt (talk) 01:37, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
    Absolutely no, the restriction is far from rational. It basically says they can speak once to say something, and only be allowed one rebuttal if they're questioned. So essentially, if they're questioned more than once about something in a thread on AN, they're screwed. This is not acceptable. You cannot stop someone from answering questions. I may disagree with some of what they say, but I will defend staunchly their right to say it. I again ask that the restriction is reviewed by an alternate admin - this close is simply flat out of order. BarkingFish (talk) 01:53, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
    If you have a better alternative, please put it on the table and we can debate it. I don't like the restriction and wouldn't have supported it if Penyulap took note and toned down their comments/replies on AN/U rather than turning it in to "Penyulap's Noticeboard". Bidgee (talk) 03:11, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
    Ok then, Bidgee - I do have a better alternative. Let me put it on the table. I propose that there be no restriction upon the number of comments that Penyulap can make - BUT - that there be a limit as already imposed of no more than 100 words per comment, and that they can only intervene on matters where they are directly mentioned or involved. This keeps the comments short - and in the right place. If the restriction were amended, would this be something you would consider, and if not - what would you change? There's got to be a better way to handle this. BarkingFish (talk) 09:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I am with BarkingFish on this one. There was no clear cut consensus to impose a restriction on Penyulap, and the discussion was closed by an involved user who was obviously interested in pushing his own agenda. Let the discussion be reopened -128.54.4.246 04:40, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't like this outcome, but I hope Penyulap will see this as an opportunity to focus on other work on Commons for a month or so. - Jmabel ! talk 05:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I fully support Mattbuck's close and the restriction. Regrettably, over the last weeks Penyulap did not show any understanding or improvement of the behaviour in question, quite the reverse. If those voting against this restriction are fine with a dysfunctional COM:AN/U, we can rename it to COM:Playground or COM:Penyulap's playground and from then on ignore any AN/U-related complaints. I'm sure most admins would be fine with that. There's enough else to do. --Túrelio (talk) 06:19, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • 100% support your idea. --PierreSelim (talk) 06:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support the idea of making COM:Playground, not only could it be a sandbox noticeboard and soapbox for Penyulap and others where they can experiment to their heart's content until they find the boundaries of the Office enforceable site terms and conditions ("You support a civil environment and do not harass other users"), it would be a good place to move future off-topic and ranty crap to from this and other noticeboards. It still puzzles me why anyone would want to use Commons as a 4CHAN style forum when there are sites out there where rants, personal attacks and defamatory material are welcomed and admired for the lolz; as unfortunately many contributors here know well. --Fæ (talk) 07:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As BarkingFish commented above, a person has the right to respond if someone includes his name/words/actions in his comment. So the current proposal is inadequate; so a clause should have added to handle this exception. I think Fæ’s intention was to discourage Penyulap from commenting on every response that any person make here. For that, you may think about banning Pen from this place (COM:AN/U) unless the complaint is against him or make complicated proposal like this with enough exceptions to make sure that his basic rights (freedom to answer if he is questioned anywhere) are not compromised. JKadavoor Jee 07:09, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Nonsense; editors are guaranteed no such rights. There are thousands of editors who are blocked or banned, and therefore have no ability to respond to COM:AN comments which mention or concern them. This is not the least bit controversial, but rather an intended effect of that particular sanction. The whole idea of sanctioning editors is that you remove some of the freedoms they previously enjoyed (and abused) in order to prevent disruption. In this particular case, the sanction is much less restrictive than a block; it allows moderated participation. If he's about to exceed his posting limit for a particular thread, either because he's not done answering questions or just doesn't feel he's said enough, he can always invite people to read further contributions of his on his user talk page or some other user-space page he creates for this purpose. —Psychonaut (talk) 07:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
      • You miss the target entirely, Psychonaut. Penyulap isn't blocked. And while that is the case, if they are questioned here, they should be entitled to reply here. If people were sitting here discussing a potential block on me (which admittedly, they are) – and I wasn't allowed to comment because of a restriction – I'd request an admin to lift it. I'd be buggered if people were going to discuss me here without me being allowed right of reply. Penyulap should be granted the same. Moderated participation is not acceptable in those circumstances. BarkingFish (talk) 08:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
        • I'm not missing anything. In the unlikely event that someone starts a discussion in the next month proposing to block Penyulap (or proposing any other action of great importance to Penyulap), and Penyulap believes it will be necessary to make more than his set number of contributions, then the last one of those contributions should end with, "I am currently under a community restriction from posting further comments in this section. Any further correspondence from me on this topic will be posted at User talk:Penyulap." Let him exercise his right of reply there. —Psychonaut (talk) 09:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
      • Nonsense? Is it our policy to wait till so many valuable contributions are collected; then start to harass them by making some deletion requests repeatedly; try to provoke them; then block them by finding a "reason" that he used bad words against our admins? Then it is wise to save myself from this place before you start turning against me. Thanks all. JKadavoor Jee 11:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment -- I see nothing wrong with the closure by Mattbuck and MichaelMaggs except that it shoud have been done immediately after the outcome was announced. As per the sanction I beleive it is a civilized and sensisite measure, which tried to avoid a ban or a block. It is a shame that the offender didn't take the opportunity and decided to attack personally everyone who supported the proposal, with old material taken out of context. It should be clear by now that the continuation of the old behavior will have much more serious consequences. Penyulap, please take a break and try to understand why so many editors disaprove your ways. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Just to clarify: I was not involved in the discussion in any way, nor in the closure. My only contribution was to add a summary of the restriction for the benefit of those who might not want to trawl through the whole saga. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:19, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
    • And while you're at it, Penyulap, please understand why there are more than a few editors who feel that you're not being treated fairly, and that this restriction was placed by someone who was clearly involved in your case. Leave it for a month, and we'll see where it goes - but this is a freaking travesty. 'Set number of contributions...' ha! coughbollockscough. 09:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BarkingFish (talk • contribs) 10:23, 24 April 2013‎ (UTC) (Thank you whoever caught this - I missed out a ~ when I signed this. Damn keyboard and my temper don't help! :D ) BarkingFish (talk) 09:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
I don't really see myself as involved with the topic. I posted I think two comments in it and when closing I applied a sanction which was significantly lighter than the one initially voted on. There was a 2:1 majority of actual users who supported the proposal, and a majority of all voters supported the proposal. That counts as consensus. The thread was not going to go anywhere further - someone needed to close it - and the new proposal was irrelevant because the original sanction was in place. I will not reverse my closure of a topic which had a result and where no further discussion could possibly be helpful. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:40, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok then, if you care to read back up this section, I have suggested an alternative to the present restriction. Since you won't reverse your closure of what is obviously (in my eyes at least) a bloody poor decision, I'll file my suggestion and ask for debate on it. The restriction currently in place is wrong, and your decision to close it even moreso. BarkingFish (talk) 10:56, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Could someone uninvolved now close this thread as it obviously isn't going anywhere? If folks want to grief about general issues rather than the case, then COM:VP is a good location. If you want to enjoy writing comments like "coughbollockscough", then this noticeboard is probably one of the worst places to test the limits because nobody will give a damn, until you manage to step over the line into disruption or harassment, with the inevitable consequence, primarily due to you being an arse by wasting everyone's time trying to poke the bear, checking the dead horse really is dead and generally baiting for the LOLz. There are plenty of useful things to do, why not have a crack at adding some votes to open Deletion requests? I'm sure there will be some dubious selfies for deletion to get hot and bothered about. --Fæ (talk) 12:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

[edit] IPv6 support

Months ago I found that accessing Wikipedia.org from a native IPv6-only machine worked fine. Recently, however, I am not able to connect from a Windows7 machine on TimeWarner cable (US) with only the IPv6 stack loaded. I can access other sites such as google.com, US government sites, Akamai, etc., so I presume something has changed about the Wikipedia IPv6 configuration.

Please continue to make Wikipedia natively accessible via IPv6 for the benefit of worldwide connectivity. Thanks.

  • 1) This is not Wikipedia, you are on the wrong site. 2) I thought that I saw IPv6 edits just recently. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 02:36, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Foroa

Foroa (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads) block user

He started an edit war for instance here/ and here/here, deleting the names he thinks were wrong multiple times, without leaving a comment or a category redirect. I never wanted to end in an edit war, so I wrote him as far as I noticed his deletions, expecting an explanation of what was happening (actually in the second case I was definitely wrong, but didn't know). From a message to his talk all I got back was a rude threaten.

As many other users (see his talk) I gently asked to leave a category redirect when he moves a category name, since I just came from a wikipedia's Commonscat link and found a strange red link, here. His answer was just deleting the redirect I just created again (15:27, 27 apr 2013).

I also asked if he can reply to me to my user talk, as anyone, he just replied ironically.

I have a very light knowledge of Commons procedures (probably this is not the proper place to report a problem with an admin), I am mostly an uploader, but his arrogance and lack of cooperation is starting to be annoying, and I think it is not compatible with the admin flag. His cancellations of cat can be dangerous as we are missing a lot of link entering from the wikipedias version (with Commonscat and similar). I am a Commons user from a long time, so I can find the new names quite easily, but when I try to leave a redirect to less familiar users, I am not expecting to get it deleted soon without any reason. His pretens of "Unusability of the system" was just ridiculous. --Sailko (talk) 16:21, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I do think that Foroa's approach to naming categories is more in line with the international nature of Commons. The only thing that confuses me is that he didn't want to temporarily put a redirect. But I think that's a minor issue. In this case I feel that the best thing would actually be for you to add " (Florence)" to the names of categories of streets and other generic objects. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
The issue is not the name of categories, the issue is a rude admin who doesn't explain what he does, starts kind of edit war and ignores on purpouse legitimate requests. --Sailko (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Sailko, rudeness is a basic property of most admins here. JKadavoor Jee 04:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I will probably sound "rude" then. But Foroa did explain, I had no knowledge of the situation, and I read the links that you have yourself posted and nothing else, and understood the situation quite clearly. Foroa was direct, but that's not the same thing as being "rude". Foroa provided enough information to understand the situation. Maybe it was possible to be nicer to you, but that is not a responsibility of anybody. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 04:46, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Gustavo neto

Hello. You can tell the user Gustavo neto to stop putting logos (nike, puma) on the kit? wikipedia us, we were told that the only logos allowed were those of adidas. thank you--Principal adjoint (talk) 23:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

[edit] User:Charliechaplinofficial

Apparently went through all Charlie Chaplin images, removing licensing tags and substituting links to the company he represents. Unfortunately, a large part of this is completely bogus, since (for example) "The Kid" is in public domain in the United States (released before 1923), etc. This individual also seems to be pretty confused about licensing posthumous personality rights for Chaplin's estate vs. owning copyrights for everything Chaplin did in his career and every photograph of Chaplin -- his firm may do the first, but it self-evidently cannot do the second. Don't feel like manually reverting all the user's edits to image pages, but it should be done... AnonMoos (talk) 05:13, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

  • The user also seems to be randomly removing descriptions in other languages, categories, and other useful information. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=95234440"